What do they mean by “bad blood”?
In this particular case, bad blood refers to instances where a person has bad genes creating a greater likelihood that should they procreate with another individual, it is possible that their own children or even their children’s children will suffer from some form of genetic abnormality or disease. As seen in the case of the film “Bad Blood,” this fear manifests itself through varying forms of selective marriage practices as well as instances of distinct discrimination against individuals who have been identified as carriers of potentially unwanted genetic traits.
Why are people afraid of genetic diseases? What were the different ways that the people in the film respond to these fears of genetic mutations or diseases? What are the specific ways (biological and cultural) that they could overcome these fears?
The fear of genetic disease can be considered a manifestation of the inherent desire to have healthy children. All parents want what’s best for their children, and in this particular case, this desire became fear over what their children could possibly suffer if they had imperfect genes. It is actually a reasonable fear to have since the desire to procreate with a healthy and viable mate has been ingrained into us on a genetic level. It is also quite interesting to note that different individuals in the film had different responses to the fear of genetic disease. Some, such as those seen in the case of the people of Japan, seemingly attached a great deal of stigma to the issue of genetic “impurity,” resulting in few marriage prospects for those who were victims of the Hiroshima bomb.
On the other hand, others, such as the couple suffering from dwarfism, took to the issue of genetic mutations in a more accepting fashion. What is identifiable in all cases is that there is a great deal of social stigma attached to genetic mutations despite varying degrees of acceptance regarding certain genetic diseases or mutations. Taking this into consideration, the best way to allay such fears is to help people understand that the chances of passing on mutated genes are quite rare and will most unlikely never occur to them.
What is the take-home message of this film? What is the main argument of the film?
The take-home message that the film is trying to impart is the fact that though genetic mutations can be passed down from generation to generation, the fact remains that out of millions of cases, this can only happen once or twice. In other words, most individuals are quite safe from the possibility of acquiring a genetically recessive trait, and as such, we really shouldn’t put as much credence into genetic paranoia as we do today.
The main argument of the film relates to the issue of the people of Hiroshima and the possibility of their children possessing genetically mutated characteristics. The film states that based on the findings of various forays into the local population of Hiroshima, there was little evidence to suggest that the current population is at risk of creating a race of genetically mutated offspring, and as such, people should stop being obsessed over the issue of bad blood and just move on with their lives.
Why do you think modern genetic testing for diseases is important? What are the implications for quality of life for genetic testing? Consider what the increased risks of new biomedical knowledge are through genetic prescreening? What should we do with this new capability and knowledge?
From a certain perspective, it can be seen that testing for diseases is important since it helps parents be more aware of potential problems that may occur and take the necessary steps to be prepared for it. On the other hand, when it comes to introducing the possible social ramifications that commercialized genetic engineering could have on society, no example does it best than the movie “Gattaca.” In the film, we can see that instead of society being divided along with gender, ethnicity, or race, it has instead turned towards the quality of a person’s genetics as the primary means of determining an individual’s worth and place in society.
A person’s future is no longer dictated by the desire or ambition to make something of their life, but rather they are evaluated based on their genetic predispositions for intelligence, athleticism, or potential temperament in the workplace. In essence, a person’s future is, in effect, dictated not by fate, chance, ambition, desire, or intelligence but rather on the choices his/her parents had made before he/she was already conceived. One of the problems with genetic engineering is its potential to turn children into mere commodities with society ignoring the ethical ramifications of creating a generation of adults that had their lives planned since birth (The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering, 2007).
If a child’s future can be decided based on the types of genetic traits a doctor can include in his/her overall genetic makeup, parents could, in effect, decide whether their child will be a doctor, athlete, underwear model, or whatever career they desire. This, in effect, takes away a child’s choice to determine what their future will be and, in effect, turns them into a commodity rather than a unique individual with any number of potential futures ahead of them. In fact, it is based on this that it must be questioned whether this form of genetic “improvement” in effect takes a way a person’s freedom of choice.
It is everyone’s basic human right to have the freedom of choice, the freedom to choose their life, and as such, this is an indelible and irrevocable aspect of any person’s basic human rights. It is based on this that new knowledge into genetics should also come a certain degree of ethics and morality into the practice wherein we should not quantify the worth of an individual based on their genetic potential rather on what they themselves strive to achieve.
Through your own research, using the internet and library resources, identify and describe in detail another or different type of genetically inherited disease similar to the ones presented in the film (specifically one identified as Mendelian) that results from an autosomal dominant or recessive condition. Provide the name, and a brief summary of the mechanism of expression (genotype), location on the genome (if known), describe the onset, manner of manifestation, outcomes, population distribution, and if a particular behavioral or historical or environmental factor has been identified
Crohn’s disease is identified as a variation of the NOD2 gene and the protein attached to it; it is a genetically inherited defect classified as an inflammatory bowel disease (Raszewski, 2011). Overall manifestations of it come in the form of severe abdominal pain, vomiting, weight loss, skin rashes over certain parts of the body, constant fatigue, and inflammation of the eyes. To this day, Crohn’s diseases affect 48 out of every 100,000 individuals around the world and can manifest at nearly any age. There is currently no known cure; however, it isn’t considered particularly fatal due to certain forms of medication allowing the disease to enter into remission.
Reference List
Raszewski, R. 2011. Inflammatory Bowel Disease: The Essential Guide to Controlling Crohn’s Disease, Colitis and Other IBDs. Library Journal, 136 (19) – 90.
The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering. 2007. Publishers Weekly, 254 (11) – 51-52.